Tuesday, October 19, 2004
There is a train of thought among some pro-life Catholics that goes like this:
That political actions (appointment of judges, passing legislation, overturningRoe v. Wade, amending the constitution) directly or indirectly aimed atrestricting or prohibiting abortion are innefective, unimportant and/orcounter-productive, because we must first change the culture so that abortionsare not desired and/or change economic and other circumstances so thatabortions aren't viewed as necessary. Therefore, a politician's stand on theseissues is less relevant to our vote.
A few thoughts on this:
1. Law can itself help to shape the culture we want to create. Consider drunkdriving laws. Or anti-smoking ordinances. Laws of various degrees were enactedfirst, and societal disapproval of these actions subsequently increased,leading to a culture willing to accept yet stricter laws and harsher penalties.Basic point -- neither laws nor culture exist in a vaccuum, building a cultureof life makes pro-life legislation more likely, and pro-life legislation buildsthe culture of life.
2. Even if circumstances changed and abortions were *dramatically* reducedtomorrow, the lack of protection for unborn children in law would remain afundamental injustice! If in the 1840s there were rapid changes in technologythat made slavery less economically beneficial and thus less common, would thathave been sufficient? If a candidate has positions on other issues that youbelieve will, at least temporarily, reduce the incidence of abortions, of whatlasting value is this if he is also committed to solidifying the lack of legalprotection of the unborn child? (so that, when economic circumstances changeagain, there are as many or more abortions than there were previously)
3. There is a sub-corrolary to this that will sometimes say -- if i vote forpro-life legislator x, whatever good he does we'll be blocked by pro-abortionjudge y. At the SAME TIME it says, if i vote for pro-life executive a, hisnominations for judges will be blocked by pro-abortion legislator b. And so itis concluded that the election of legislator x and executive a is futile.Yikes! This strikes me as the perfect way to ensure the continued legality ofabortion, solidify the extremist positions of pro-abortion politicians, anddiscourage pro-life politicians from taking any bold stands or risks.
4. The introduction of legislation is helpful to shaping the debate even whenit is not successful. Witness how the debate on partial birth abortioncontributed to a more pro-life attitude in the public as a whole during theClinton years. When pro-choice zealots are seen to be opposed to even mildlegislation like 24 hour waiting periods and pre-abortion counseling, or theUnborn Victims of Violence Act, of the Fetal pain awareness act (which havenothnign to do with abortion per se, but are opposed because they have animplicit recognition that the fetus is alive and has value)... then the realityof their position becomes more apparant to society.
That political actions (appointment of judges, passing legislation, overturningRoe v. Wade, amending the constitution) directly or indirectly aimed atrestricting or prohibiting abortion are innefective, unimportant and/orcounter-productive, because we must first change the culture so that abortionsare not desired and/or change economic and other circumstances so thatabortions aren't viewed as necessary. Therefore, a politician's stand on theseissues is less relevant to our vote.
A few thoughts on this:
1. Law can itself help to shape the culture we want to create. Consider drunkdriving laws. Or anti-smoking ordinances. Laws of various degrees were enactedfirst, and societal disapproval of these actions subsequently increased,leading to a culture willing to accept yet stricter laws and harsher penalties.Basic point -- neither laws nor culture exist in a vaccuum, building a cultureof life makes pro-life legislation more likely, and pro-life legislation buildsthe culture of life.
2. Even if circumstances changed and abortions were *dramatically* reducedtomorrow, the lack of protection for unborn children in law would remain afundamental injustice! If in the 1840s there were rapid changes in technologythat made slavery less economically beneficial and thus less common, would thathave been sufficient? If a candidate has positions on other issues that youbelieve will, at least temporarily, reduce the incidence of abortions, of whatlasting value is this if he is also committed to solidifying the lack of legalprotection of the unborn child? (so that, when economic circumstances changeagain, there are as many or more abortions than there were previously)
3. There is a sub-corrolary to this that will sometimes say -- if i vote forpro-life legislator x, whatever good he does we'll be blocked by pro-abortionjudge y. At the SAME TIME it says, if i vote for pro-life executive a, hisnominations for judges will be blocked by pro-abortion legislator b. And so itis concluded that the election of legislator x and executive a is futile.Yikes! This strikes me as the perfect way to ensure the continued legality ofabortion, solidify the extremist positions of pro-abortion politicians, anddiscourage pro-life politicians from taking any bold stands or risks.
4. The introduction of legislation is helpful to shaping the debate even whenit is not successful. Witness how the debate on partial birth abortioncontributed to a more pro-life attitude in the public as a whole during theClinton years. When pro-choice zealots are seen to be opposed to even mildlegislation like 24 hour waiting periods and pre-abortion counseling, or theUnborn Victims of Violence Act, of the Fetal pain awareness act (which havenothnign to do with abortion per se, but are opposed because they have animplicit recognition that the fetus is alive and has value)... then the realityof their position becomes more apparant to society.
Thursday, August 12, 2004
By Brian LesterSpecial to The CS&T
If you were hit by a water balloon while walking to class at Temple University in the late 1980s, Father Steve McDermott wants to offer a big apology. You were very likely the victim of the Sigma Pi fraternity slingshot, which was used to launch the balloons from the roof of the fraternity house onto unsuspecting students.
Today, as parochial vicar at St. John the Baptist Parish, Manayunk, Father McDermott restricts his dealings with water to baptisms and sprinkling rites. The same goes for two of his friends from the fraternity, Philadelphia priests Father Paul Stenson and Father Mike Spitzer.
On July 29, 140 young adults gathered at Finnigan’s Wake, 3rd and Spring Garden Streets, for the third installment of the Theology on Tap series to hear Father McDermott, Father Stenson and Father Spitzer share their stories of how God led them to conversions at Temple University and, eventually, to their ordination as priests.
None of the three speakers had instantaneous, “St. Paul-style” conversions, they said. Each was led in a unique way over a number of years. But there is the common factor in their journeys: Mary led each young man to a life committed to her Son.
Father Stenson was the first to join the fraternity and the first to leave. Although when he arrived at Temple he “just wanted to party,” he soon found he wasn’t happy. Through the prayers of his mother and sister, Father Stenson was eventually led to a prayer meeting.
“If they’re all weirdoes I can’t stay,” was Father Stenson’s promise to his sister before walking in. Eventually he joined his family on a pilgrimage to Medjugorje. After returning from the pilgrimage, Father Stenson was filled with a great desire for prayer and the sacraments, and consequently began to fall away from his involvement with his fraternity.
Father McDermott and Father Spitzer had joined the fraternity some time after Father Stenson. His disappearance from the fraternity house left them wondering. Though they both had started to practice their faith at that time, each still had his feet firmly planted in the secular world.
Father Spitzer said many times [after he started taking his faith more seriously] he’d be up in his room praying a rosary, then go downstairs for a while to join a party, and then find himself back up in his room at the end of the night praying.
Through some providential occurrences, Father McDermott and Father Spitzer were also able to go on a pilgrimage to Medjugorje. That is when the Lord truly won the battle for their hearts, they said.
Father Stenson and Father Spitzer entered St. Charles Seminary, and were ordained together in 1998. Father McDermott took a more circuitous path, spending five years working for the Keswick theater, and three years as a theology teacher at Archbishop Ryan High School before entering the priesthood. He was ordained in 2003.
“God uses absolutely everything!” said Father McDermott. “At the Keswick theater I was in charge of concert planning — everything from when the truck pulled up early in the morning until the end of the show. But now, instead of coordinating Johnny Cash’s band, I’m directing the lectors and altar servers.”
Father Spitzer and Father Stenson, who took marketing and public relations classes at Temple together, are now using their degrees for a holy purpose: “Selling the Good News.”
All three priests noted that even their not-so-Christian experiences in the fraternity are used for good.
“You can’t shock me in the confessional,” said Father Stenson.
“When someone has lived the party life and then come to faith, I think it gives them some credibility in a really skeptical world. They can truly say they tried to find pleasure there and found it empty,” said Mary Borneman, a parishioner at Our Mother of Good Counsel, Bryn Mawr. “You can tell they are really fulfilled and happy as priests. You can’t easily dismiss that kind of witness.”
Father Stenson is currently parochial vicar at St Katherine of Siena parish in Northeast Philadelphia. Father Spitzer is pursuing a doctorate in Moral Theology in Rome.
This summer’s Theology on Tap series is sponsored by the Office for Youth and Young Adults. Rosey Stracquatanio, Assistant Director for Young Adult ministry, coordinates the series with the help of a team of volunteers from several parish-based Young Adult ministries.“Theology on Tap is about meeting people where they are. This program is designed to reach out to everybody, from someone who hasn’t been to Mass in years, to active Catholics interested in learning more about their faith, to someone who is just looking to hang out and meet new people,” Stracquatanio said.
“The goal is to offer topics relevant to young Catholics in today’s world, where we can openly discuss the fullness of the Church’s teachings and how we can continue to live them out.”
Find out more about Theology on Tap by visiting www.oyya.org/yam and click on yam events.
Brian Lester is the former chair of Young Adults of St. Katherine and St. Isaac Jogues (YASKI) and works as a human resources consultant in center city.
If you were hit by a water balloon while walking to class at Temple University in the late 1980s, Father Steve McDermott wants to offer a big apology. You were very likely the victim of the Sigma Pi fraternity slingshot, which was used to launch the balloons from the roof of the fraternity house onto unsuspecting students.
Today, as parochial vicar at St. John the Baptist Parish, Manayunk, Father McDermott restricts his dealings with water to baptisms and sprinkling rites. The same goes for two of his friends from the fraternity, Philadelphia priests Father Paul Stenson and Father Mike Spitzer.
On July 29, 140 young adults gathered at Finnigan’s Wake, 3rd and Spring Garden Streets, for the third installment of the Theology on Tap series to hear Father McDermott, Father Stenson and Father Spitzer share their stories of how God led them to conversions at Temple University and, eventually, to their ordination as priests.
None of the three speakers had instantaneous, “St. Paul-style” conversions, they said. Each was led in a unique way over a number of years. But there is the common factor in their journeys: Mary led each young man to a life committed to her Son.
Father Stenson was the first to join the fraternity and the first to leave. Although when he arrived at Temple he “just wanted to party,” he soon found he wasn’t happy. Through the prayers of his mother and sister, Father Stenson was eventually led to a prayer meeting.
“If they’re all weirdoes I can’t stay,” was Father Stenson’s promise to his sister before walking in. Eventually he joined his family on a pilgrimage to Medjugorje. After returning from the pilgrimage, Father Stenson was filled with a great desire for prayer and the sacraments, and consequently began to fall away from his involvement with his fraternity.
Father McDermott and Father Spitzer had joined the fraternity some time after Father Stenson. His disappearance from the fraternity house left them wondering. Though they both had started to practice their faith at that time, each still had his feet firmly planted in the secular world.
Father Spitzer said many times [after he started taking his faith more seriously] he’d be up in his room praying a rosary, then go downstairs for a while to join a party, and then find himself back up in his room at the end of the night praying.
Through some providential occurrences, Father McDermott and Father Spitzer were also able to go on a pilgrimage to Medjugorje. That is when the Lord truly won the battle for their hearts, they said.
Father Stenson and Father Spitzer entered St. Charles Seminary, and were ordained together in 1998. Father McDermott took a more circuitous path, spending five years working for the Keswick theater, and three years as a theology teacher at Archbishop Ryan High School before entering the priesthood. He was ordained in 2003.
“God uses absolutely everything!” said Father McDermott. “At the Keswick theater I was in charge of concert planning — everything from when the truck pulled up early in the morning until the end of the show. But now, instead of coordinating Johnny Cash’s band, I’m directing the lectors and altar servers.”
Father Spitzer and Father Stenson, who took marketing and public relations classes at Temple together, are now using their degrees for a holy purpose: “Selling the Good News.”
All three priests noted that even their not-so-Christian experiences in the fraternity are used for good.
“You can’t shock me in the confessional,” said Father Stenson.
“When someone has lived the party life and then come to faith, I think it gives them some credibility in a really skeptical world. They can truly say they tried to find pleasure there and found it empty,” said Mary Borneman, a parishioner at Our Mother of Good Counsel, Bryn Mawr. “You can tell they are really fulfilled and happy as priests. You can’t easily dismiss that kind of witness.”
Father Stenson is currently parochial vicar at St Katherine of Siena parish in Northeast Philadelphia. Father Spitzer is pursuing a doctorate in Moral Theology in Rome.
This summer’s Theology on Tap series is sponsored by the Office for Youth and Young Adults. Rosey Stracquatanio, Assistant Director for Young Adult ministry, coordinates the series with the help of a team of volunteers from several parish-based Young Adult ministries.“Theology on Tap is about meeting people where they are. This program is designed to reach out to everybody, from someone who hasn’t been to Mass in years, to active Catholics interested in learning more about their faith, to someone who is just looking to hang out and meet new people,” Stracquatanio said.
“The goal is to offer topics relevant to young Catholics in today’s world, where we can openly discuss the fullness of the Church’s teachings and how we can continue to live them out.”
Find out more about Theology on Tap by visiting www.oyya.org/yam and click on yam events.
Brian Lester is the former chair of Young Adults of St. Katherine and St. Isaac Jogues (YASKI) and works as a human resources consultant in center city.
Wednesday, April 28, 2004
Memo from Screwtape to Newspaper Editors
Principles for covering Abortion Protests
1. Gush at how big abortion rights marches are. Accept organizer estimates at face value. Assert over and over that it is one of the largest marches in history. Show ariel views of the march to accurately convey how vast it is. At anti-choice marches you have the option of not mentioning numbers, using nebulous terms like "several thousand" or accepting "official estimates" provided that they are low enough. Avoid showing ariel views of anti-choice marches. Show close ups of a few dozen people, the more radical the better. Or even better yet -- show pro-choice counter protestors!
2. Never mention that although no significant nationwide aboriton rights march has taken place in 12 years, a very large March of Anti-Choice extremists takes place every single year in the same location. Also don't mention that those marches take place in typically frigid January weather, and 5/7ths of the time its on a weekday, while yesterday's march was on a Sunday in the Spring. Pointing out things like this adds perspective and confuses the readership.
3. Talk about how amazingly diverse the abortion rights crowd; even if it isn't. Write lots of stories about the families who travel together as "generations of choice". Mention how religious pro-choice people are. Stock quotes from Catholics for a Free Choice and Religious Coalition for Reproductive rights are easily obtained.
4. Never mention diversity in the anti-choice movement. Democrats for Life, Feminists for Life, Libertarians for Life, Athiests for Life and the Pro-Life Alliance of Gays and Lesbians and other organizations should be ignored if they
don't fit the stereotype of screaming Christian Fundamentalist waving pictures of dead fetuses.
5. Even though you're excited by how many different pro-choice t-shirts and banners can be made using the president's last name and/or the vice-president's first name; you should skip mentioning this. Also avoid pointing out the
presence of signs that read: "If Only Barbara Bush Had Choice," "Barbara Chose Poorly," or "The Pope's Mother Had No Choice". Reporting signs like that would
help people realize that when we say choice, we actually mean death, and studies have determined that its better if we keep most people thinking that choice means, well, choice. Finally, we shouldn't mention the constant use of
the f-word (and we don't mean feminist!) in the speeches at the rally. In general, don't mention the vulgarity of the march. A lot of those red-state simpletons don't understand how funny all this is.
6. Finally, If you don't see any acts of aggression from pro-lifers, act utterly surpirsed and befuddled. Imply that there would have been violence if there wasn't a strong police presence. On the other hand; when pro-abortion
marchers spend the day screaming at women silently holding signs that simply say "I regret my abortion"; ignore this entirely.
Principles for covering Abortion Protests
1. Gush at how big abortion rights marches are. Accept organizer estimates at face value. Assert over and over that it is one of the largest marches in history. Show ariel views of the march to accurately convey how vast it is. At anti-choice marches you have the option of not mentioning numbers, using nebulous terms like "several thousand" or accepting "official estimates" provided that they are low enough. Avoid showing ariel views of anti-choice marches. Show close ups of a few dozen people, the more radical the better. Or even better yet -- show pro-choice counter protestors!
2. Never mention that although no significant nationwide aboriton rights march has taken place in 12 years, a very large March of Anti-Choice extremists takes place every single year in the same location. Also don't mention that those marches take place in typically frigid January weather, and 5/7ths of the time its on a weekday, while yesterday's march was on a Sunday in the Spring. Pointing out things like this adds perspective and confuses the readership.
3. Talk about how amazingly diverse the abortion rights crowd; even if it isn't. Write lots of stories about the families who travel together as "generations of choice". Mention how religious pro-choice people are. Stock quotes from Catholics for a Free Choice and Religious Coalition for Reproductive rights are easily obtained.
4. Never mention diversity in the anti-choice movement. Democrats for Life, Feminists for Life, Libertarians for Life, Athiests for Life and the Pro-Life Alliance of Gays and Lesbians and other organizations should be ignored if they
don't fit the stereotype of screaming Christian Fundamentalist waving pictures of dead fetuses.
5. Even though you're excited by how many different pro-choice t-shirts and banners can be made using the president's last name and/or the vice-president's first name; you should skip mentioning this. Also avoid pointing out the
presence of signs that read: "If Only Barbara Bush Had Choice," "Barbara Chose Poorly," or "The Pope's Mother Had No Choice". Reporting signs like that would
help people realize that when we say choice, we actually mean death, and studies have determined that its better if we keep most people thinking that choice means, well, choice. Finally, we shouldn't mention the constant use of
the f-word (and we don't mean feminist!) in the speeches at the rally. In general, don't mention the vulgarity of the march. A lot of those red-state simpletons don't understand how funny all this is.
6. Finally, If you don't see any acts of aggression from pro-lifers, act utterly surpirsed and befuddled. Imply that there would have been violence if there wasn't a strong police presence. On the other hand; when pro-abortion
marchers spend the day screaming at women silently holding signs that simply say "I regret my abortion"; ignore this entirely.
Friday, September 12, 2003
There is some posting going on in St. Blog's regarding a Dignity Mass being held at the University of Detroit / Mercy. Mark Shea and others have asked their readers to contact Cardinal Maida and the university administration.
Just to put things in perspective, here are some different models for ministry to homosexuals:
Dignity's Purpose Statement:
Um ... no.
Then, in the middle of the road, the format most Diocesan ministries take:
htttp://www.naclgdm.org
Which, depending on who's in charge on a local level can be a basis for a fruitful faithful ministry or basically a Diocesan approved quasi-Dignity chapter. *sigh*
And then there's Courage
Now, maybe Cardinal Maida has serious concerns about the prudence of loudly and publicly removing a Dignity Mass from a local Catholic College. Maybe as long as its not in parishes we should be happy.
But if you won't denounce the group which is selling spiritual death, can't you at least publicly praise, and invite to the diocese, and offer resources to a group that offers spiritual life?
The ambivalence of most dioceses toward Courage is disheartening.
Just to put things in perspective, here are some different models for ministry to homosexuals:
Dignity's Purpose Statement:
"We believe that gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender persons can express their sexuality in a manner that is consonant with Christ's teaching. We believe that we can express our sexuality physically, in a unitive manner that is loving, life-giving, and life-affirming. We believe that all sexuality should be exercised in an ethically responsible and unselfish way.
DIGNITY is organized to unite gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender Catholics, as well as our families, friends and loved ones in order to develop leadership, and be an instrument through which we may be heard by and promote reform in the Church."
Um ... no.
Then, in the middle of the road, the format most Diocesan ministries take:
htttp://www.naclgdm.org
"We urge those in ministry to:
reflect on Sacred Scripture,
reflect on Church teaching and pastoral practice,
study the social and physical sciences,
listen to and ponder the lived experience of lesbian and gay persons and their families.
This ministry respects the human dignity and human rights of lesbian and gay persons, and affirms that all who are baptized are called to full participation in the life, worship and mission of the church. "
Which, depending on who's in charge on a local level can be a basis for a fruitful faithful ministry or basically a Diocesan approved quasi-Dignity chapter. *sigh*
And then there's Courage
"The following five goals of Courage were created by the members themselves when Courage was founded. The goals are read at the start of each meeting and practiced by every member in daily life.
Live chaste lives in accordance with the Roman Catholic Church's teaching on homosexuality. (Chastity)
Dedicate ones life to Christ through service to others, spiritual reading, prayer, meditation, individual spiritual direction, frequent attendance at Mass, and the frequent reception of the sacraments of Reconciliation and Holy Eucharist. (Prayer and Dedication)
Foster a spirit of fellowship in which all may share thoughts and experiences, and so ensure that no one will have to face the problems of homosexuality alone. (Fellowship)
Be mindful of the truth that chaste friendships are not only possible but necessary in a chaste Christian life and in doing so provide encouragement to one another in forming and sustaining them. (Support)
Live lives that may serve as good examples to others. (Good Example)"
Now, maybe Cardinal Maida has serious concerns about the prudence of loudly and publicly removing a Dignity Mass from a local Catholic College. Maybe as long as its not in parishes we should be happy.
But if you won't denounce the group which is selling spiritual death, can't you at least publicly praise, and invite to the diocese, and offer resources to a group that offers spiritual life?
The ambivalence of most dioceses toward Courage is disheartening.
Thursday, September 11, 2003
Let it begin with me
John at Disputations offers some advice if we're exasperated by Bishops:
Amen!
John at Disputations offers some advice if we're exasperated by Bishops:
When the problem is always them, though, the problem is never me. And the problem that is me is the one problem we have each been commanded to resolve. My job is not to impose a plan of action that will guarantee the survival of the Church in the United States. My job is to guarantee the survival of the Church in the United States by seeing that it survives in me. That, ultimately, is the one thing I have control over -- and, it seems to me, it's also ultimately the only way of reforming and purifying the Church. I can't reform and purify you, I can't reform and purify them, and I certainly can't make you reform and purify them.
Amen!
Tuesday, September 02, 2003
Christ bids us to be a little nuts
Blogger Athanasius reminds us that "In a world gone mad and corrupted by sin, it's more sane to be crazy"
St. Simeon Stylites, Pray for Us.
Blogger Athanasius reminds us that "In a world gone mad and corrupted by sin, it's more sane to be crazy"
St. Simeon Stylites, Pray for Us.
Monday, September 01, 2003
Meet the Brothers
Check out these Lay Brothers from the Franciscan Friars of the Renewal
And here you can find some history of the vocation of a Franciscan Religious Brother:
Check out these Lay Brothers from the Franciscan Friars of the Renewal
And here you can find some history of the vocation of a Franciscan Religious Brother:
The male branch of the Franciscan family, a community of Lesser Brothers, is made up of men who are both clergy and consecrated laity traditionally called "lay brothers". In its early years the Franciscan family was made up of a majority of lay brothers with fewer priests. Yet, in time the Order would undergo what some describe as a process of "clericalization" with ordained members becoming dominant in numbers, authority, and influence
History shows, however, that despite the increase of clerical members in the Franciscan family, the notion of the Order being a "gospel brother" had never been extinguished, and in some times and places regained new vigor. The Capuchin reform in the early 16th century brought a fresh vitality to the identity and role of the non-ordained friar. The list of Capuchin lay brothers known for their sanctity and influence in the Church is formidable. The ranks of the early Capuchin reformers were composed mostly of lay members who acted as guardians (superiors) of friaries, and in some instances, preachers.
